2012 Volvo C30 T5

Once again I've been trying my best to update when I have the time, sorry about the wait. I've reviewed this car already but there are some differences with this new trim level.

Introduction: The Volvo C30 is Volvo's return to the coupe market. There was the Volvo 300 series which in all honesty were terrible, and the Volvo 400 series which most of the world was never given. The design of the C30 particularly of the rear was inspired from an Volvo from the past, the P1800ES. Now to build this C30, Volvo uses the exact same platform as the S40 and much of the interior is what you'll find from the S40. The whole point of this car is to allow Volvo to escape their safety obsessed past which essentially pointed Volvos as square and boring, nothing you'd actually want. Volvo released the C30 with a series of engines, for the Canadian market we were given the 24i and T5, in America only the T5 was available. Due to its price bracket and the sort of customers buying the C30, the 24i was eventually dropped leaving only the T5.

Anyways, I didn't think I'd be writing about this car again but it seems I have and there's good reason to take another look again. This one is the powerful T5 version. So, can an engine actually change my opinion on a car enough to make me say its better or worse than before?

Performance: The C30 T5 is given a turbocharged 5-cylinder engine, hence the T5. This engine produces 227 hp and 236 lb.ft of torque. This engine is coupled to a 5-speed automatic, or 6-speed manual but for this review it'll be the automatic. Now, compared to a lot of the other cars I've driven this doesn't sound like much. The difference is the C30 weighs less than 3000 lbs whereas most of the other cars with this sort of power these days are generally 3500 lbs. As a result this gives the car an acceleration time of 7.1 seconds from 0-100 km/h, according to Volvo the manual is capable of 6.7 seconds. This is a lot better than the 323i or a C250 and way quicker than most other cars of this size. I like this engine quite a lot, there isn't much sense of turbo lag nor is there a lot of torque steer to ruin the experience. The only flaw I can think of is when pushed, the fuel economy is not impressive.

My Score: 10/10 - A very good engine, well specified for this car.

Handling: The old car handled very well and sure enough even though this one has turbocharging equipment it feels much the same. The only difference this time is the extra power from the engine. As a result the excellent handling from the Ford C1 platform is amplified with the excitement coming from the engine. The steering weight is very well done, you don't get a whole lot of understeer and zig-zagging by traffic is a breeze for a car of this size with this amount of power. Even with the good handling, the ride isn't spoiled either with a tough suspension. As far as excellent handling FWD cars, this is one of the best.

My Score: 10/10 - No complaints at all.

Interior: Not much has changed about the interior if anything. The read outs are much the same, the interior styling is exactly the same, the buttons and everything seem very much the same. However I will go a bit more in-depth than I did in the old review especially seeing that I should've separated the S40 and C30. Due to this car's pricing point the interior is a bit more upscale than a regular hatchback. You're given a leather wheel, leather seats, sun roof and all those sorts of nice things. The dash is mostly plastic, while there are some bits where some attention to detail was given like the center console, its not a whole lot different than most other cars as far as materials are concerned. The seat belt holders despite having coupe-like doors are actually well placed unlike say a Civic coupe or held on cheaply like a Cobalt coupe. This means using the seat belt isn't a difficult stretch if you're not tall. The rear seats are modest as far as passenger space but not ideal. The space in the tailgate area is actually quite generous considering the size of this car, 2 full size suit cases could easily fit. Lastly the visibility is actually quite good despite the tiny rear windscreen. Due to this car's small size, the blindspots are no larger than a normal car's. As for the build quality, again this car is made in Ghant, Belgium and it seems they do a very good job putting the car together.

My Score: 6/10 - Same as last time, kind of expensive for what you get.

Styling: Not a lot has changed here either but if I'm honest I've always felt the C30 looked a lot better than the S40 and since it was one of my earlier reviews I failed to separate it thinking they're sort of the same. The new styling changes primarily deal with the front where the headlamps are larger and look more aggressive, the grille is no longer a simple rectangle, and the fog lamp housing looks way better. This makes the front look quite a lot better. The rear has always been my favourite part of the car and I'm glad Volvo didn't change that. Its so unique and yet it also looks very good.

My Score: 10/10 - This was the score I should've given the C30 years ago. It looks great even today.

Value for money: Things have changed since 2 years ago. Now, the Volvo is in competition against the Audi A3 and the Lexus CT. First things first, the Volvo badge still isn't the best badge to have as far as luxury is concerned. However with a T5 its priced at 30K which is 7K less than the Audi and nearly the same as the Lexus. Performance-wise the Volvo is easily better than the Lexus which has no chance as its very slow, the Audi has less power with its 4-cylinder turbo but ends up faster by a small margin unless you get the C30 manual. Practicality, the Audi is better being offered in 5-door option and same deal with the Lexus. Features, the Audi is no different than the C30. Worse for the Audi, at the end of the day its just an expensive Golf. The C30 now with actual competition, starts to actually look better. I think it does well, and weirdly its easily the oldest.

My Score: 7/10 - The Audi is faster, slightly nicer trimmed and a bit more practical, but the C30 is better looking and all in all better value.

Overall: 43/50 - The C30 in with this engine is a great car. If you want a small, fast and mildly luxurious car the C30 is the best choice.

2012 Fiat 500 Sport

I got a chance to drive something I wasn't expecting. I think this is a most curious car that many are wondering whether they should bother with.

Introduction: The Fiat 500 was originally introduced in 1957 as a sort of people's car in the same vein as the Volkswagen Beetle. A very inexpensive and small city car that's affordable to most people regardless of income. Back then it was equipped with a various selection of 2-cylinder engines all smaller than 600cc but weighing less than 500 kg. Ever since this car, Italy's mobility increased significantly and to this day focus heavily on making good small cars while also making today's fastest supercars. Today's car is a essentially a look back at the historical significance of the original 500. This new car was first introduced in 2007. Major changes have been made, first its based off the platform of the Fiat Panda making it front engined and front wheel drive, not like the original car's rear engine and rear wheel drive. The size differences are noticeable as well, while nobody will call the new 500 big, compared to its namesake its actually massive. Lastly, the original car was meant to be the least expensive choice for the Italian driver today's 500 isn't really the least expensive car out there. Fiat decided to bring over this 500 as a symbol of their return to the North American market after leaving in the 1980s. Over here, the Fiat 500's main competitor is BMW's MINI, hoping to replicate that success for the 500.

I wasn't expecting this car to show up at all. I know a few places that used them as fleet cars but I wasn't expecting this car, let along the Sport model. This is the very first Italian designed car I've been given the chance to drive, leaving only British and French cars are the only major automotive nations I haven't driven a car from. Anyways, when seeing this new 500, it definitely is a lot smaller than majority of cars sold here. So, this test was really to determine whether this car is all about style with no substance or whether there really is something to this car that justifies its price.

 

Performance: The Fiat 500 for North America is given a different engine compared to those in Europe. We are given the 1.4L Multiair engine. This engine produces 101 hp and 98 lb.ft of torque, which seems like a very small number considering most cars available today produce more power than that. However the Fiat does weigh less, this is one of the few cars available in North America that is less than 1000 kg or 2200 lbs. Its acceleration times as a result from 0-100 km/h is 9.7 seconds. Not blisteringly quick but if you've seen some of my reviews particularly of Dodges, I've driven slower before. So if you're worried about highway merging, you could do worse. This engine is equipped with either a 5-speed manual or 6-speed automatic, I was given the auto and its fuel economy was acceptable. Being the sport model, it does matter if you use the sport button it as the engine revs higher in sport mode. When driven hard, this engine is a bit noisy, that said its not as annoying as other engines are...so you might like it.

My Score: 7/10 - It does its job reasonably well. A bit noisy but overall not too bad.

Handling: Once again here's another car where the focus is on how it handles. Its given a big advantage due to its light weight and small size. There are also differences if you have sport mode on or off. When you have the car running in normal mode, the steering is very light and very easy. My guess is this is what the regular user is going to use and in this mode the mundane tasks of parking are made much easier with this car's good maneuverability. However in this mode its not all that fun. When you turn on the sport mode, this changes. The steering is suddenly stiffened and the car all the sudden feels more alive, its difficult to explain. The car starts to feel sharper and more eager to tackle the corners compared to normal mode. This button really seems to make a big difference. As an enjoyable small car, I can't fault its handling since during normal mode all the stuff you need to do while driving is made very easy, with sport mode you get to enjoy driving which is nice after a hard day. I could go into depth about the rest of the handling characteristics but I find its easier to say that the car's handling faults don't matter because this car is fun.

My Score: 10/10 - Easy to drive, and with a touch of a button fun too.

 

Interior: This is another area where Italian car design tends to be different from other automotive nations. From a normal person's perspective this seems like any other small car, kind of cheap and the interior is very small. However, when you look at the details more carefully there are some things that were done rather well. First off, one of the large dash trim pieces will be coloured the same as the exterior of your car. If you picked a bright colour, your interior's atmosphere improves greatly over the typical dull grey boredom we're used to seeing in most cheap cars. Next is the gauges, it looks like it has one dial but a careful look shows both speedo and tach are in the same place. As a result, as you drive along your revs attempt to catch up to the speedo, lovely touch. Lastly the controls, no they're not metal but Fiat has deliberately avoided to use of too many ugly knobs to avoid spoiling the look of the dash. As for the practical stuff, the seats are fine for someone of my size. I get the feeling an obese person will not like it at all as you're likely to bother the passenger because of how close the seats are to one another. There are two seats in the back, but  realistically unless your as short as I am, nobody else will fit in the back. This may be a hatchback but because of its small size, you're not going to be taking a lot of shopping back with you. Rear visibility in this car is pretty good. The build quality so far is difficult to determine, this is after all made in the same factory as the PT Cruiser in Toluca, Mexico but that car wasn't made well. My example seemed to be fine so far, I may update this entry later.

My Score: 7/10 - Neat styling touches and nice atmosphere, but significantly reduced practicality due to its size.

Styling: This car takes most of its inspiration from the original 1957 Fiat 500. However its given that rather ordinary small car and turned it into a cute one. You're given rather nice rims for the Sport model. It also manages to integrate all of today's automotive exterior necessities like fog lights and so on, rather well. This is the sort of car a child would like as a anthropomorphic character like Herbie the Beetle. I see this car appealing particularly to female drivers and children. Men might not want this sort of image.

My Score: 10/10 - An excellent modern take on a ordinary city car. 

Value for money: This is the area of scoring that troubles me. This sport model I've been driving costs $18,500 and that's for the manual, the automatic is another $1000. The fuel economy is not great to justify this cost. Its got very little practicality as a daily driver, unless you drive alone. Now, compared to the Mini it competes against, its still cheaper. However it also has to compete with rather ordinary cars and its hard to justify the value. This sport model puts this Fiat's price where the Subaru Impreza starts. On most tangible levels the Fiat doesn't do well. If you care a lot about styling and cheap fun, then you'll like the Fiat. If however you need more out of a car than that, look elsewhere because that's all the Fiat focuses on.

My Score: 2/10 - Style with a bit of substance, but that's it really.

Overall: 36/50 - A very likable car, does certain things brilliantly but its as limited in practicality as many sports cars and its a bit pricey.

2012 Ford Focus SE, SEL, Titanium

I'll try to keep updating far more frequently than I did last year. Any way, onto this review.

Introduction: The Ford Focus has been Ford's compact car since the end of the 20th century. The original Focus was developed for the European market. Ford of America once again decided to use another Ford of Europe design despite the failure of the older Contour/Mondeo, as Ford had no successor to the domestic market Escort. The Focus was altered mechanically for US factories and regulations, however it appears this is the prime reason for the Focus to earn its reputation as the most recalled vehicle of the year. By 2004 the amount of recalls issued were severely reduced, few were sure of whether the Focus' reputation would recover. By 2007, the Focus was redesigned, however this version did not follow the European Focus which was based on a new platform. As a result this was merely an extension of the original Focus without the option of a wagon and an unsuccessful coupe. Ford CEO Alan Mulally signaled that the whole Ford lineup regardless of where it competed would use World models meaning there will no longer be regional or national differences on Ford models. The goal was to significantly reduce the amount of models Ford has in its global lineup. As a result the 2012 Ford Focus will no longer sport any real differences from its European counterpart, often seen as the better car. For the first time in North America, Ford will be offering its performance version of the Focus called the Focus ST.

I was pretty excited to get a chance to drive this new Focus. I've always been hearing that the European Focus drove better than any of the North American Focus models. Part of the reason has been the NA Focus never had a sport tuned version in the same way as Europe got the Focus ST, Focus RS and Focus RS500. The day this lot arrived I was eager to see whether Ford deserved to be taken seriously for the first time in this segment.

Performance: Regular Ford Focus models use a 2.0L 4-cylinder engine regardless of which trim level. The only changes to be made in 2012 will be the addition of the ST model which will feature a turbocharger. This 2.0L engine produces about 160 hp and 146 lb.ft of torque. This is one of the first few direct injection engines made available by Ford and it seems to show in its fuel economy numbers. You're given a choice in transmissions, a 5-speed manual or a 6-speed dual clutch automatic. Now there have been some issues surrounding the dual clutch automatic Ford uses, the most notable is that its rather jerky in low gears like 1st and 2nd. Due to its dual clutches it does have minor amounts of roll back on hills as well before the 2nd clutch engages. Ford has issued a software update, this still does not seem to satisfy some users. If you're worried about these issues, then go for the 5-speed manual which has no issue but it has a higher highway fuel consumption due to lacking that extra gear. The car itself, despite its somewhat high hp numbers isn't all that quick, this is where torque matters. Its acceleration time from 0-100 km/h is about 8.7 seconds. Still good for the class but not what one expects from a direct injection engine.

My Score: 8/10 - Acceptable performance, good fuel economy but the dual clutch transmission is not for everyone.

Handling: As is the case with modern cars, the Ford Focus is also equipped with electric power steering. To be brutally honest, even Ford hasn't got the tuning correct on this. At low speeds the steering is very light but a bit numb, its only when the car is moving faster that the steering feel is more noticeable. That said when taking the Focus on corners, it handles very well for a family vehicle. To me it makes no difference if you have the Titanium package wheels or the regular wheels with hubcaps. Both vehicles have decent ride comfort, its a tad more firm than a few of its competitors but not bone shaking as say the terrible Dodge Caliber. For true handling feel though, I'd have to pick the Mazda3 over the Focus because that car still uses a hydraulic assist system, and that just feels way better.

My Score: 8/10 - Good handling, good ride comfort, steering is a bit lacking in feel however.

Interior: This is where the differences start to show in the trim levels. The SE will be equipped with a pretty standard interior, nothing totally unusual. Controls are relatively simple to use and despite not being a MyFordTouch model it still has a two small LCD screens, it has voice activated controls, cruise control, etc. The SEL and Titanium models however replace the small center LCD screen and replace it with a much larger touch screen in the center known as MyFordTouch. You still have HVAC controls available should you not like using the touch screen, which are button based instead of knobs like the cheaper versions. The stereo controls however are mostly gone and will have be operated using MyFordTouch. The MyFordTouch system is something you either love or hate, once in a while its also prone to glitching. Should your unit glitch, unplug the battery for 5 minutes tends to reset the whole system. A software recall has also been issued, due to complaints. The higher trim levels come with seat warmers. Another difference between the two is the hand brake, on the lower trim levels its relatively small, the higher trim level models have a very large one. Not available in base spec of any trim level however are rear parking sensors, self parking(for parallel parking), electric seats and leather, those are optional extras even in Titanium spec. There are lot of pockets in the rear to put things in. When it comes to hatchback versus sedan, I definitely would go with the hatchback, it has a lot more useable space in the tailgate. The atmosphere of the interior is mostly dark, and even in the SEL/Titanium version way too much hard plastic. The build quality on these cars is average, generally acceptable but lemons do occur. The Focus is built in Wayne, Michigan, USA.

My Score: 7/10 - A somewhat high tech interior of the bunch, MyFordTouch is hit or miss, many items are still an optional extra and the materials definitely could be better.

Styling: Gone is the Gillete grille that Ford was using for the past few years, which I'm happy to say. It looked terrible on the previous Focus. This car is a lot closer to the European styled cars, the front may seem a bit busy near the bottom. The side profile of the car easily makes the hatchback look very good, the sedan is not nearly as nice. The wheels you get depend on which trim level you bought, the hubcap wheels are obviously cheap looking, the Titanium's wheels do look good. Its a bit more generic however considering Hyundai's new styling. So I'll just say its good but not great.

My Score: 7/10 - A nicer looking car than before, looks quite good as a hatchback but at the same time is a bit generic.

Value for money: With this new entry, this segment is extremely competitive. On the one hand you have the Ford Focus, Chevrolet Cruze and Hyundai Elantra all being the newest and hitting the 40 mpg highway numbers or 5.88L/100 km for metric. On the other hand some of the older stuff like the Mazda3 and Civic are getting upgraded to match these newer cars or in the case of the Dodge Caliber is already dropped with a new model ready to come out. Where the Ford sits is probably being one of the better all rounder, its offered as a hatch or sedan, its got loads of options, its reasonably well equipped at the start, and its priced pretty competitively. If this is what you require, a car that's pretty good at most or not all levels, then the Focus is probably your best choice. If you have more specialized tastes where you want your car to excel at certain areas, you'll have to look elsewhere. As for which options to pick, I find the Titanium not really worth the cost unless you like those wheels, you get much of the toys in the SEL. If you hate MyFordTouch the SE will do fine. Still, a good car at a good value.

My Score: 8/10 - Good all rounder choice, however the market is very competitive and the car doesn't excel in any specific area.

Overall: 38/50 - Its a good car, for me though it just wasn't as good as I was hoping it would be.

2012 Toyota Camry LE

I'm so sorry I haven't updated in several months. Not to worry I have driven many cars since those posts, just make this up to date I'll post some new ones.

Introduction: The Toyota Camry has been one of the most successful cars ever made. Over the years it sold so many examples all over the world, being the most successful in North America. It has had stumbles and wasn't a particularly good seller in Europe where it was replaced by the Avensis. The Camry had its humble beginnings in 1982 where it replaced the old Toyota Corona. This was one of Toyota's earliest front wheel drive models and was used to highlight how much interior space there is available in a compact car, its grown much larger since. The Camry actually started taking off in 1987 in the second generation model where it was a bit larger, had larger 4-cylinder engines and a V6 available. In 1992 the Camry was again reworked and once again was larger and this time due to Toyota discontinuing the Cressida, this Camry was now the flagship model until the introduction of the Avalon in 1995. Toyota has made a name for itself with the Camry by essentially prioritizing quality and reliability, as a result many Camrys from the past are still widely seen and in some cases still running as well as much younger cars. Toyota however has had a slip in their later models, the 2007 generation Camry was criticized for its lower quality and much higher number of recalls than before.

Here's the question, has Toyota made serious improvements so that the Camry is a serious contender once again? Before I drove this car, the most modern Toyota I drove before was the Corolla which was awful. The outgoing Camry which I've been in had a very cheap and awful interior. My hope with this new Camry is that Toyota finally understand that today's competition is not going to let them take this segment for granted. In order for the Camry to retain its #1 spot it has got to be deserved, it must feel like a proper Toyota. The sort of car where it does everything well, avoiding real criticism.

Performance: I only have access to the standard 4-cylinder models so I won't be commenting on how this car does with the V6. The 4-cylinder you're given in this Camry is a 2.5L that produces 179 hp and 171 lb.ft of torque, despite being the same engine as the outgoing car its up 10 hp and 4 lbs in torque. Naturally being a Toyota it was already fuel efficient in the old car, more surprisingly however this new car is even more efficient than the old car and actually beats the Sonata despite lacking direct injection. On the road this engine is actually very quiet and very refined. Its 0-100 km/h time is roughly 7.8 seconds, that's...actually pretty good consider its not even the strongest of the field. Toyota definitely shed some weight and its paying off in acceleration and fuel economy. The bad news, no more manual transmission Camry.

My Score: 8/10 - Good engine, does everything you'd expect for an economy minded engine. I always wish it were faster but hey, they did leave the option open for direct injection.

Handling: This category was where I was most worried, that the car would feel like an appliance. I hated the Corolla's handling so much that I wasn't looking forward to what this car offered. Well, whatever Toyota did surprised me. It still has electric power steering but this unit was way better tuned than the one found in the Corolla. Its still somewhat light but it was heavier than I was expecting, thus this car is pretty easy to maneuver. Even better was there was some inkling of feel when taking the turn so this wasn't actually boring. Where the car however did best was the ride comfort, the hard road surfaces of Ontario roads after winter still don't bother this car. Now as you'd expect from this class of car and with front wheel drive, when taking corners hard you'll understeer and you'll feel body roll. Its not hugely athletic but again its more than acceptable.

My Score: 7/10 - Rides well, suffers a bit dynamically but overall still pretty good.

 

Interior: A few changes have been made over the old car. First thing is the dash board, the dials all have a modern blue look and no longer have the green that even the outgoing Toyota had which felt 90s. The only silly thing is there's a gauge for average fuel economy...there are more important dials to have than this like oil pressure, voltage regulator and so on. The next thing is Toyota has attempted to place leather to soften much of the dash and avoid too many hard plastics. The leather is placed at the top of the dash, around the lower portion of the center console and a few other but less important places. The newest item however is Toyota's Entune system, this replaces the stereo in favor of a touch screen. Toyota has left a few knobs for the radio tuning, volume and HVAC controls. What Entune however does is allow you to connect you're phone if it has bluetooth to become hands free but also able to use your phone's music library. Connection is easy, have your phone's bluetooth on, tell Entune to connect and that's it, surprisingly user friendly. Entune is not as high tech as Ford MyTouch nor are the visuals as pleasant but consider the customer base of the Camry, this isn't important. The car's C-pillars are not too difficult to look out of, there's a lot of head room and its still very spacious inside including the trunk. Due to the price point its hard to complain about this new interior aside from the fact it could use even better materials.The car is even pretty well made, Camrys sold in North America are built in Georgetown, Kentucky, USA.

My Score: 9/10 - Way better than the outgoing car, Entune is easy to use, very spacious and the materials are way better than before, all I can say is they probably could go just that bit further.

Styling: Much of my initial worries of this car came down to the styling. It just hasn't changed all that much from the gone 6th gen, the shape is generally the same and a lot of the exterior features still had some the old car's cues. The good news is the fat butt look of the old one is gone. The bad news is at the rear, the tail lamp styling is awkward at best, it just doesn't fit the car that much. On the front, that grille isn't all that attractive either, the fog lamp covers are a bit gaudy. The only solution to that front is getting the SE version of this car which looks much better with its paint coloured grille, due to SE's being the best selling trim level it seems many Camry buyers agree. Not much can be done to the rear though.

My Score: 5/10 - Mostly boring, Toyota tried to liven the back but this didn't really work.

Value for money: After all is said and done, the Camry has definitely returned to the car that deserves its spot as one of the best selling cars out there. For a practical family sedan, there's not much against it. The handling is acceptable, there's enough power even in the 4-cylinder, its more fuel efficient than its competition and unlike before you're getting much more for your money this time. The only real reason not to consider the Camry is going to be down to this, if you're American the Hyundai warranty is better, you may hate the way it looks and want the new 2013 Ford Fusion, your local Toyota dealers are awful or you just want something that stands out.

My Score: 10/10 - If you're in the market for a midsize sedan, its really hard to argue against at least considering the Camry.

Overall: 39/50 - A very good choice of car, it may be a bit conservative and common but this one is attempt to cement its reputation in spite of setbacks.

2010-2011 Mazda3 GX

Due to the lack of updates from before I'll post another review this time of a compact car.


Introduction: As I mentioned in my previous review of the Mazda3, it introduced in 2004 as the Mazda Protege's replacement. It uses Ford of Europe's C1 platform for the successful Euro Ford Focus. Since its introduction the Mazda 3 has become one of Mazda's all time best selling vehicles in certain markets belonged to the top 10 selling vehicles. As a global vehicle the Mazda 3 found in one location was stylistically the exact same in another car market. The Mazda 3 offered a sedan and hatchback body types, one could also buy a Mazdaspeed 3 which had a 4-cylinder turbo engine making it one of the quickest FWD hatchbacks sold in most markets. Mazda replace the current 3 in 2010 with a new redesign, due to the old 3's success Mazda rather than totally change the vehicle decided to fine tune what they believed made the 3 so successful. For the 2012 model year, Mazda will introduce its new SkyActiv powertrain which will put the Mazda3 as one of the most fuel efficient cars in its segment without resorting to a hybrid system.

The old Mazda3 was a great car to drive so naturally I was rather eager to try out this version. I know quite a few people don't like the way this car looks but I was willing to look past that and see if Mazda3 made any meaningful changes to see whether they made it better...or ruined it.


Performance: The only model of the Mazda3 I got to drive is the basic GX model and unlike the previous model I driven this one has the 2.0L engine. It produces 150 hp and 135 lb.ft of torque. This engine accelerates this car from 0-100 km/h in about 9 seconds with the automatic which isn't horrible but not all that quick. As the engine cruises along its actually a quiet motor, when accelerating that's when its a bit buzzy. The fuel economy from this engine was reasonable against the Corolla and Civic, but these days it looks thirsty compared to the new Cruze, Focus and Elantra. This will change though as the 2012 model is supposed to match the newer cars with the SkyActiv powertrain.

My Score: 7/10 - This engine is good at what it does, while not hugely powerful its pretty reasonable in all other respects but on fuel economy you may want to wait for the 2012 model.

Handling: This was where the old Mazda3 was at its utter best. I'm glad to say...the new one is just as good as the old one. Despite its slight weight gain it feels just as sharp and as nimble as it used to. The ride is as stiff as the older car but not to the degree of sport suspension ride choppiness. It seems as if Mazda went against going for a purely electrical power steering system and as a result this car feels a lot nicer to drive than many cars it competes against. I'm glad Mazda didn't actually change any aspect to the 3's handling. Yes there's some slight body roll and being FWD it will eventually understeer but for normal driving its still very very good.

My Score: 10/10 - No changes to report from last time...and none were needed.


Interior: This is one of the biggest change from the old car and the new one. I like the look of the newer gauges over the busy looking ones from the older car. I also liked the info display screen is in the center so you don't have to totally remove your eyes from the road. The controls are much better designed than before making it easy to make adjustments without looking often. The carpet is very much upgraded over the older car's rather easy to ruin carpets. The dash is sort of a soft touch one, not entirely soft but not the awful hard plastic you'd find in a Corolla or Civic. Its not all perfect though, there are still some cheap plastics to be found. The visibility in this car is reasonable, although the higher trunk line does reduce some of the rear visibility. The seats are pretty comfortable and reasonably supportive. The trunk size...still isn't very large though and the interior spacing is still not brilliant for rear seated passengers. Otherwise though, the interior has quite a few needed improvements over the old one. As for the build quality, its excellent not a single problem to report. The Mazda3 is assembled in Hofu, Japan.

My Score: 9/10 - Many many improvements over the old car, the spacing is really the only big item left to improve on.

Styling: This is the next biggest change on the Mazda3. What Mazda decided to do here was to put on the styling made by the Nagare concepts into its lineup. Many disliked the fact that looking at the car its always smiling and happy. I on the other hand, while not a fan of the look I do appreciate Mazda was trying to do something different and potentially risky. Not too many cars act the way they look, this is one of the few cars that can symbolize the feeling the driver is getting while they're driving this car. From the rear the car is a bit less interesting, an evolution of the older car's rear to match its front. Standing out from the crowd of otherwise boring cars, by trying something different it seems Mazda wanted to differentiate itself.

My Score: 8/10 - Provocative front, ho hum rear.

Value for money: The pricing in this segment is very competitive and the Mazda3 is very much one of those cars eying for more market share. In its base form the car is very cheap and is at least equipped with power doors and windows. In its ability to excite the driver, nothing in this class is as good. It only falters when it comes to fuel economy and available standard equipment. In its favour it offers a hatchback option meaning its competition on that level is only Ford, Toyota, Hyundai, Mitsubishi and Dodge. The main trouble comes from Ford and Hyundai who these days offer much nicer looking cars inside and out with better fuel economy, for much of the same money and in the case of the Ford even goes after the Mazda's strong point of driving dynamics. When this car first came out it was easily the best choice, with fierce competition its no longer the obvious choice but still a very good one.

My Score: 9/10 - Still a very good car but fierce competition has meant Mazda may need more in order to keep their sales going strong for this car. What keeps its score high is the fun level and being an all around very good car with few weaknesses to report.

Overall: 45/50 - A very good compact car, few offer as much fun for very little money as Mazda does.